To the Reader: This article is written to be read start to end with no need for the reader to trace the link’s and extra material reference.
That is the brevity of it. After words, when brevity hits, if there was clarity provided it might be enjoyable to then to check out the quality of my citations.
Furthermore, this article is written in response to Allen Farrington’s Inflation In A Hyperbitcoinized World to which I will pull out the important parts for the reader. …
I’ll cue this video for the moment Paul says that he doesn’t need context in order to know the implied definition of a word. The significance or summary is that Paul is claiming that words don’t need context in defense of my accusation that he is misinterpreting a passage wrong.
I’m not sure we discussed the exact passage he was speaking to but I’m sure he would agree it was effectively this that is on the wiki for Ideal Money:
….money intrinsically not subject to inflation… ~https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_money
When we interpret that passage with inflation meaning “stable purchasing power” we…
Its a semantic point in a sense but its also one of re-solution. We can understand that with the introduction of local versus non-local bounds (ie perspective) something can have a non-locally derived value.
This could be viewed as “intrinsic” value in the sense of the above debate in that it would set a local floor for the value money medium even if there was no local non-monetary usefulness for it.
This might not be a full argument for a floor for the globally held market valuation of bitcoin, however, even if we subscribe to the need for a non-monetary…
With bitcoin, for quite some time, you will hear it said that it has no intrinsic value and therefore cannot compete with gold or a commodity based money. This speaks to the idea that a good money medium will necessarily have a non-monetary use-case that provides a floor from the value of it falling to zero.
Semantically speaking this is wrong from the Austrian or Libertarian Bitcoiner’s point of view because there is no such thing as intrinsic value in their school of economic thought. …
The best known form of money among the native Americans north of Mexico was wampum, made out of the shells of a type of clam. However its use was not confined to the coastal states but spread far inland, e.g. the powerful Iroquois amassed large quantities by way of tribute. Wampum’s use as money undoubtedly came about as an extension of its desirability for ornamentation. Beads of it were strung together in short lengths of about 18 inches or much longer ones of about 6 feet.
Wampum came to be used extensively for trade by the colonists as well as…
The ultimately launched concept of “ideal Money” became possible when I conceived of a practical basis of a standardization of the comparison of the value of the currency with an appropriate standard of ideal.
…
…a modern alternative is possible, one that would provide a good standard independent of state pardoners. This idea occurred to me fairly.~Ideal Money
In 2002 John Nash published a paper in the Southern Economic Journal entitled “Ideal Money” in which he proposed an ideal basis for the global economy as an alternative to the gold standard.
The concept, which he called an ICPI, was a…
In his work The Theory of Free Banking George Selgin describes how a banking system would evolve in a hypothetical land Ruritania. The inquiry is based on an assumption of an “unregulated society” such that there doesn’t initially exist a monopoly on the issuance of the money supply:
Another approach, which also helps in interpreting historical evidence, is to base assumptions on a logical (but also conjectural) story of the evolution of a “typical” free banking system, as it might occur in an imaginary, unregulated society called Ruritania.
At first glance the story of Ruritania and the banking system that…
Menger Origins of Money
It is not impossible for media of exchange, serving as they do the commonweal in the most emphatic sense of the word, to be instituted also by way of legislation, like other social institutions. But this is neither the only, nor the primary mode in which money has taken its origin.
However, there is no praxeological difference between a medium of exchange and money. For the difference here boils down merely to one of how one defines the word “money,” and to what extent the medium in question is accepted in the market in order…
Another approach, which also helps in interpreting historical evidence, is to base assumptions on a logical (but also conjectural) story of the evolution of a “typical” free banking system, as it might occur in an imaginary, unregulated society called Ruritania. The story can be supported along the way by illustrations from actual history. But it only accounts for features of past banking systems that were predictable (though perhaps unintended) consequences of self interested, individual acts, uninfluenced by legislation.
Our story involves four stages: First, the warehousing or bailment of idle commodity money; second, the transition of money custodians from bailees…
